Premium
Test–retest reliability of wide‐pulse high‐frequency neuromuscular electrical stimulation evoked force
Author(s) -
Neyroud Daria,
Grosprêtre Sidney,
Gondin Julien,
Kayser Bengt,
Place Nicolas
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
muscle and nerve
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.025
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1097-4598
pISSN - 0148-639X
DOI - 10.1002/mus.25747
Subject(s) - intraclass correlation , trunk , stimulation , physical medicine and rehabilitation , medicine , muscle belly , tibial nerve , muscle contraction , electromyography , anatomy , physical therapy , biology , clinical psychology , ecology , tendon , psychometrics
: We compare forces evoked by wide‐pulse high‐frequency (WPHF) neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) delivered to a nerve trunk versus muscle belly and assess their test–retest intraindividual and interindividual reliability. Methods : Forces evoked during 2 sessions with WPHF NMES delivered over the tibial nerve trunk and 2 sessions over the triceps surae muscle belly were compared. Ten individuals participated in 4 sessions involving ten 20‐s WPHF NMES contractions interspaced by 40‐s recovery. Mean evoked force and force time integral of each contraction were quantified. Results : For both nerve trunk and muscle belly stimulation, intraindividual test–retest reliability was good (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.9), and interindividual variability was large (coefficient of variation between 140% and 180%). Nerve trunk and muscle belly stimulation resulted in similar evoked forces. Discussion : WPHF NMES locations might be chosen by individual preference because intraindividual reliability was relatively good for both locations. Muscle Nerve 57 : E70–E77, 2018.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom